Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Dr. John Watson View Post
    I'm going on memory here, but as I recall no one ever heard of Druitt until Macnaghten mentioned him as a suspect and later writers took it and ran with it. Macnaghten, of course, didn't join Scotland Yard until 1889, and everything he learned about the Ripper murders came second hand - some from police files and much in the form of hearsay from other police sources. My guess is that the "private information" he cites, suggesting even his family considered Druitt a suspect, came not from Druitt's family but from another Scotland Yard source, perhaps passing along something supposedly said by Druitt's brother. Bottom line: Aside from rumor, speculation, and a great deal of latter day attempts to make the foot fit the shoe, there's not a shred of real evidence tying Druitt into any of the Ripper murders.

    Dr. John
    Well said Doctor


    The Baron

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Dr. John Watson View Post

      From what I could make out from this terrible copy, it looks like Druitt won his case. If so, he should have been the opposite of suicidal.
      Mr Watson, sorry for the terrible copy and not being an expert on copy and pasting PDF files my humble apologies

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post

        Wick, The reason I put it up was because I thought it might be of interest to show Druitt's state of mind before he committed suicide. IE In my opinion the fact that he was working as a barrister the previous Tuesday might add weight to the reason he committed suicide was his dismissal as a teacher three days later.

        What a dangerous Lawyer..

        He goes to courts at the mornings light, and kills prostitutes at the dark of the nights..

        Why there were no films about Druitt till now?! What would make a better story than this?!


        The Baron

        Comment


        • Why there were no films about Druitt till now?! What would make a better story than this?!
          Because filmmakers prefer unbelievably childish nonsense like Randy Williams non-theory.
          Regards

          Herlock




          “...A yellow fog swirls past the window-pane
          As night descends upon this fabled street:
          A lonely hansom splashes through the rain,
          The ghostly gas lamps fail at twenty feet.
          Here, though the world explode, these two survive,
          And it is always eighteen ninety-five.”

          Comment


          • It is hard to believe that the Druitt family would have been the only family in Whitechapel to have suspicions about a male family member of a certain age. Unusual behavior, unexplained late night absences or even an offhand remark like "well those whores deserved what they got" might have been enough to get the ball rolling. And even if the Druitt family did suspect Monty, we have no way of knowing the extent of their suspicion and what it was based on.

            c.d.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
              Hi Paul,

              It sounds to me like conjecture.

              Macnaghten joined the Met on 1st June 1889, and wrote his memorandum on 24th February 1894. There were two alleged Ripper murders between these dates, and one after. So when exactly might Macnaghten have concluded that the Ripper committed suicide in December 1888?

              Regards,

              Simon
              Who said it was other than conjecture? Conjecture is not 'pie in the sky', especially when it is based on a reasonable assessment of the evidence as we have it.

              As for 'exactly' when Macnaghten concluded the Ripper committed suicide in December 1888, he states, does he not, that the private information was received some years after he became a detective officer? So take a guess at sometime before 24 February 1894. I think that's about as precise as one can get.

              Why do you ask?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
                Hi RJ,

                In his February 1894 memorandum, Melville Macnaghten did not express a particular preference for any of his three “more likely” suspects. He wrote—

                “A much more rational theory is that the murderer’s brain gave way altogether after his awful glut in Miller’s Court, and that he immediately committed suicide, or, as a possible alternative, was found to be so hopelessly mad by his relations, that he was by them confined in some asylum.”

                This suggests the suspect may have been either Druitt or Kosminski. Yet in his supposed “draft version,” in which he gave Druitt's age as 41, he made up his mind and wrote—

                “I enumerate the cases of 3 men against whom Police held very reasonable suspicion. Personally, after much careful & deliberate consideration, I am inclined to exonerate the last 2 [Kosminski and Ostrog], but I have always held strong opinions regarding no. 1 [Druitt], and the more I think the matter over, the stronger do these suspicions become. The truth, however, will never be known, and did indeed, at one time lie at the bottom of the Thames if my conjections be correct” [my brackets and italics].

                It bears the hallmarks of a subsequent version.

                Regards,

                Simon
                If memory serves me correctly, I think those who analyse sources have found that the shorter of two documents is usually the later one, the writer refining a text and enhancing objectivity by either removing personal opinion or incorporating alternative opinion or both. If so, the Aberconway version would be the earlier draft of the report found in to SY files.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post

                  Paul, If the private info was compelling surely he would have shared it with overs, or else it would have been a complete dereliction of duty. He thought that five women had been slaughtered by the same hand, do they not count? Justice for them against the reputation of a family he barely/or didn't know? And of course the police Force and their failure to capture the killer. Plus the reputation of one of his colleagues was severely on the line with criticism abounding, anti semetic etc when he said that Jack was a polish Jew. Could he not have had a private word with Anderson or Swanson for that matter telling them he had this private info which more or less proved Druitt was the killer.
                  To my mind the private info was rumours of Druitt,s sexuality, history of mental illness within the family, the fact that he could have had some surgical training and finally that someone in his family may have harboured suspicions. Timing of suicide, Macnaughten said himself that the killer in all probability would do away with himself after the last murder. And Macnaughten has his suspect.
                  Regards Darryl
                  I don't know that Macnaghten didn't share his private information with others - and if Abberline was indeed referring to Macnaghten's suspect, he clearly did share his information with others. If he shared the information, I think the rest of your points don't matter. Of course, if Macnaghten didn't share his private information with others, I imagine that he would be guilty of a severe dereliction of duty, so do you think that is something Macnaghten was guilty of? It's possible, but surely one would need to see some supportive evidence before giving it serious credence?

                  I'm not sure that Macnaghten would have been convinced about Druitt on information such as you suggest. We don't know what evidence there was against 'Kosminski', but Macnaghten thought the 'many circs' made him a pretty good suspect, and he possibly knew he was also the suspect favoured by his superior, so would he have put his money on Druitt on the basis of such scanty evidence?

                  Incidentally, there is no evidence that Druitt was homosexual. It is surmised because he was dismissed from the boys' school because of a serious offence. That needn't have been a sexual offence. It could have been violence, for example, or some other extraordinary act.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Dr. John Watson View Post
                    I'm going on memory here, but as I recall no one ever heard of Druitt until Macnaghten mentioned him as a suspect and later writers took it and ran with it. Macnaghten, of course, didn't join Scotland Yard until 1889, and everything he learned about the Ripper murders came second hand - some from police files and much in the form of hearsay from other police sources. My guess is that the "private information" he cites, suggesting even his family considered Druitt a suspect, came not from Druitt's family but from another Scotland Yard source, perhaps passing along something supposedly said by Druitt's brother. Bottom line: Aside from rumor, speculation, and a great deal of latter day attempts to make the foot fit the shoe, there's not a shred of real evidence tying Druitt into any of the Ripper murders.

                    Dr. John
                    Apart from MP Henry Farquharson who mentioned in the press (in 1891) that JTR committed suicide after the last murder and that he was the son of a surgeon.
                    Regards

                    Herlock




                    “...A yellow fog swirls past the window-pane
                    As night descends upon this fabled street:
                    A lonely hansom splashes through the rain,
                    The ghostly gas lamps fail at twenty feet.
                    Here, though the world explode, these two survive,
                    And it is always eighteen ninety-five.”

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                      Agreed!
                      My question still stands, with an average of 6 suicides per week in 1888 between 10 Nov & 31 December there was potentially 40+ suicides to pin this series of murders on - why Druitt?
                      It would be useful to know how many suicides in the Thames there actually were between 10 November and 31 December before taking speculation too far, assuming that such information was tabulated and retained. But a name would be a good start. Or social status maybe?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by PaulB View Post

                        I don't know that Macnaghten didn't share his private information with others - and if Abberline was indeed referring to Macnaghten's suspect, he clearly did share his information with others. If he shared the information, I think the rest of your points don't matter. Of course, if Macnaghten didn't share his private information with others, I imagine that he would be guilty of a severe dereliction of duty, so do you think that is something Macnaghten was guilty of? It's possible, but surely one would need to see some supportive evidence before giving it serious credence?

                        I'm not sure that Macnaghten would have been convinced about Druitt on information such as you suggest. We don't know what evidence there was against 'Kosminski', but Macnaghten thought the 'many circs' made him a pretty good suspect, and he possibly knew he was also the suspect favoured by his superior, so would he have put his money on Druitt on the basis of such scanty evidence?

                        Incidentally, there is no evidence that Druitt was homosexual. It is surmised because he was dismissed from the boys' school because of a serious offence. That needn't have been a sexual offence. It could have been violence, for example, or some other extraordinary act.
                        Hello Paul,

                        I tend to think that the fact that Macnaghten named Druitt in the first place should give us pause to ask why? If Mac was simply cobbling together a list of ‘’better that Cutbush’’ suspects then he had any number of recently dead criminals or hopelessly insane ones in asylums to throw under the bus with no second thoughts. And yet he chooses a respectable Barrister and schoolteacher, son of a surgeon, cricket playing toff with no history of violence or criminality. Surely the last person that someone of Mac’s class and loyalties would have wanted to name? And as Monty moved in the circles that he did how much easier would it have been for someone to discover an alibi for an innocent man as opposed to someone from the lower classes? A cricket match somewhere a distance away; a visit to Bournemouth; a hotel stay?

                        Basically why didn’t Mac simply name Fred Smith, drooling away in some padded cell, who once threatened a woman with a knife? Why Druitt if he didn’t feel that he had justification for naming him?
                        Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 03-31-2019, 08:36 PM.
                        Regards

                        Herlock




                        “...A yellow fog swirls past the window-pane
                        As night descends upon this fabled street:
                        A lonely hansom splashes through the rain,
                        The ghostly gas lamps fail at twenty feet.
                        Here, though the world explode, these two survive,
                        And it is always eighteen ninety-five.”

                        Comment


                        • Hi Paul,

                          By February 24th 1894 Macnaghten was Chief Constable. If he knew as late as 23rd February 1894 that Druitt was the Ripper, why did he not inform the rest of the Metropolitan Police who, the following year, busily investigated the death of Alice Graham as a Ripper murder?

                          The Macnaghten memorandum makes no sense.

                          Regards,

                          Simon
                          Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post

                            ....If the private info was compelling surely he would have shared it with overs, or else it would have been a complete dereliction of duty.
                            It would appear that Mac. was the receiver of the private information. As pointed out by Herlock, the Farquharson letter was published three years before Mac. penned his report, so other's must have known already. Discreet inquiries would be the order of the day.

                            Regards, Jon S.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post

                              By February 24th 1894 Macnaghten was Chief Constable. If he knew as late as 23rd February 1894 that Druitt was the Ripper, why did he not inform the rest of the Metropolitan Police who, the following year, busily investigated the death of Alice Graham as a Ripper murder?

                              The Macnaghten memorandum makes no sense.

                              Regards,

                              Simon
                              Hello Simon.

                              Even with Cutbush, an attempt was made to establish his whereabouts on the nights of the murders. The police can't possibly do this with a dead man (Druitt), so Mac. was never certain, "in all probability" was the expression he used if I recall.

                              Regards, Jon S.

                              Comment


                              • Hi Jon,

                                Macnaghten, the Memory Man, was never certain?

                                Is "in all probability" really the best we can muster against Druitt?

                                It's not much with which to condemn a man to eternal damnation for the Whitechapel murders.

                                Regards,

                                Simon
                                Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X